[Cankor] Report #215

[cankor at cankor.ca]

Dear subscriber,

Welcome to issue #215 of the CanKor Report.

For articles not original to CanKor, direct links are available in the
Contents section, should you wish to consult the originals on the internet.
If the links no longer function, you may refer to the full text articles
appended to the issue.

For back issues, archives and other content, please visit our website:
http://www.cankor.ca

The CanKor team

*************************************************
CANADA-KOREA ELECTRONIC INFORMATION SERVICE

CanKor # 215

Monday, 8 August 2005
*************************************************

The Six-Party Talks in Beijing adjourn for a three-week "recess," due to the
inability of the USA and the DPRK to compromise on the wording of a draft
statement, originally proposed by China. The statement was to have included
principles to guide future rounds of talks and eventual negotiations leading
to the elimination of the DPRK nuclear weapons programme. At issue is the
USA's requirement that the DPRK must also give up civilian use of nuclear
power.

In a surprise development, an ROK official reveals that the DPRK, ROK, USA
and China have agreed to launch a separate four-party forum to discuss
replacing the 1953 Armistice Agreement with a peace treaty. The Chinese
draft statement includes mention of this separate forum. A peace treaty is
deemed necessary for normalization of relations between the USA and the
DPRK.

The US Administration's non-proliferation policy has come under fire for its
inconsistent attitude toward the peaceful use of nuclear power, particularly
the contrast between its provision of technology, equipment and fuel to
India, its acknowledgement of Iran's right to develop nuclear energy, and
its intolerance of DPRK nuclear energy production.

It was the ROK delegates to the Six-Party Talks who came up with the idea of
a three-week recess, after China proposed to end the fourth round and
convene a fifth round next October.  Seoul intends to use the three-week
break to pursue intensive diplomatic efforts to narrow the differences
between Washington and Pyongyang. The first opportunity to speak with DPRK
representatives is next Sunday, when the Secretary of the (North) Korean
Worker's Party joins celebrations in Seoul of the 60th anniversary of
Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule.

Earlier in the 13-day talking marathon, the USA offered to allow the DPRK to
keep a civilian nuclear programme if it rejoined the NPT and permitted
stringent UN inspections. The DPRK turned down the US proposal, with envoy
Kim Kye Gwan insisting that every sovereign country -- even within the NPT
regime -- has the right to peaceful nuclear activities. The IAEA inspections
issue promises to remain a major sticking point.

Even before the talks began, the spokeswoman for the IAEA expressed doubt
that a convincing inspection regime could be constructed to allay all fears
of cheating. The highly enriched uranium processors could be anywhere, as
could the bombs that have already been produced. IAEA officials say that
with enough time and access, they have the technology to know with
reasonable certainty whether North Korea is keeping its word on disarmament.

The differences surrounding the peaceful nuclear energy dispute have
overshadowed the achievement of numerous positive compromises in the current
talks. The draft statement includes wording that allows both the USA and the
DPRK to save face.
*************************************************

FOCUS: Fourth round of Six-Party Talks stalls
1.   SIX-PARTY TALKS TAKE 3-WEEK RECESS
     http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-08/08/content_467045.htm
2.   FOUR NATIONS TO DISCUSS PEACE TREATY
     http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200508/kt2005080819221010230.htm
3.   SIX-PARTY TALKS PUT SPOTLIGHT ON US 'DOUBLE STANDARDS'
     http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200508/200508080014.html
4.   SEOUL FACES DAUNTING DIPLOMATIC TASKS DURING RECESS
     http://english.yna.co.kr/Engnews/20050808/630000000020050808151732E6.html
5.   CAN DIFFERENCES BE RECONCILED AFTER RECESS?
     http://english.yna.co.kr/Engnews/20050807/630000000020050807123519E1.html
6.   INSPECTING DPRK NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES POSES CHALLENGE
     http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-07-25-voa11.cfm
7.   FRESH SIX-PARTY DRAFT LETS ALL SIDES SAVE FACE
     http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200508/200508030029.html
*************************************************

1.   SIX-PARTY TALKS TAKE 3-WEEK RECESS
     by Qin Jize, China Daily, 8 August 2005

Envoys to the nuclear disarmament talks on the Korean Peninsula agreed
yesterday to take a three-week break after 13 days of intense negotiations
failed to yield a breakthrough. Talks will resume on August 29. The move was
announced at a press conference soon after delegates from the six countries
involved met for two-and-a-half hours in a final effort to draft a joint
document of agreed principles.

Wu Dawei, head of the Chinese delegation, issued a chairman's statement in
which the six parties reaffirmed the goal of denuclearizing the Korean
Peninsula in a peaceful way. They also agreed to issue a common paper to
this end. The statement summarized the progress made during the talks,
saying the six parties have conducted in-depth discussions on the paper and
reached agreement on many aspects.

Wu said a break was needed to give delegations a chance to report to their
respective governments and further study each other's positions and resolve
differences.

"I cannot say for sure when we can reach an agreement on the joint document,
neither can I say for sure that we will reach an agreement after the
recess," Wu said. "But I believe we will reach an agreement one day."

He also emphasized that the success of the nuclear disarmament talks should
not depend on a joint document. Wu compared the talks to climbing a hill,
and said the top of the hill was already in sight. "The recess will help us
get to the top more smoothly," he added. He said negotiators reached more
agreements during this round of talks than the previous three rounds which
have taken place since 2003. Differences remained, but Wu said the decision
to resume the talks in three weeks showed the six parties do not fear the
differences and are confident that they can be overcome.

As US chief delegate Christopher Hill was watching the press conference, Wu
asked a cameraman to film him and welcomed him as an observer. Analysts said
this shows China sees Washington as playing an active role in the talks.

Yan Xuetong, an international affairs expert at Tsinghua University, said
that during the recess the lines of communication would remain open, and
China would continue to contact various sides and promote the talks.
Analysts said the patience, sincerity and expectations of the six parties
had made them work hard at negotiations.

Hill said yesterday at his hotel that a lot of progress has been made in the
13-day talks, but attributed the recess to the remaining differences between
Pyongyang and Washington. He said he was still hopeful that a joint document
could be reached in the next stage, adding that the Chinese draft was an
excellent starting point. Hill said if an agreement could be reached at the
end of August, he was looking forward to moving on to the next stage, the
fifth round of talks.

Around the same time, Pyongyang's chief negotiator Kim Kye Gwan said at a
press conference in his country's embassy in Beijing that the US must change
its position on requiring the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to give
up its nuclear programme for peaceful use. He said it is the key to the
success of the next stage of talks.

Both Washington and Pyongyang said they are ready for more bilateral
contacts to resolve differences.
Meanwhile, Pyongyang and Tokyo held a one-on-one meeting yesterday.
According to Kim, the two sides discussed issues concerning the Japanese
side. Tokyo has been seeking face-to-face dialogue with Pyongyang on the
issue of kidnapped citizens since the talks started on July 26. China
insisted the issue be resolved through bilateral contacts.
*************************************************

2.   FOUR NATIONS TO DISCUSS PEACE TREATY
     by Ryu Jin, The Korea Times, 8 August 2005

South and North Korea along with China and the United States will start
discussions to replace the armistice treaty, which ended the Korean War in
1953, with a peace treaty, a steppingstone to a normalized relationship
between the USA and the DPRK, according to sources Monday. The four nations,
which participated in the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear programs
with Japan and Russia in the past weeks, agreed to launch a separate
four-way forum to discuss the matter, an official involved in the talks said
on condition of anonymity.

The official said a joint statement, which was drafted by China for
negotiations but could not be finally agreed upon due to fissures on some
key points, included an article on the separate forum which will discuss
measures to bring an everlasting peace to the Korean Peninsula.

"It states that a separate forum will be formed to discuss the establishment
of a system that would ensure peace on the peninsula," the official said,
adding the "system," though not specified in detail, means one that would be
set up with a peace treaty.

South and North Korea have remained technically at war since 1953 as the
Korean War ended only with an armistice treaty, and the two countries still
confront each other along their heavily fortified border. North Korea has
long demanded negotiations with the USA for a peace treaty, but tried to
exclude the ROK, as the armistice treaty was signed by the supreme
commanders of only the three parties -- North Korea, China and the US-led
United Nations Command.

Experts say the replacement of the 52-year-long ceasefire would mean a
springboard for not only an eternal peace on the peninsula, but also a
normalized relationship between North Korea and the USA. They seemed to be
approaching a more normalized relationship up until the late 1990s, when
Bill Clinton led the US administration. But President George W. Bush's
administration became more hostile toward the Kim Jong-il regime, though it
has recently shown some flexibility.

James Kelly, former top US envoy on the nuclear issue, said in an interview
with The Korea Times just before his departure from the Bush administration
late last year that Washington "could consider a peace treaty" with
Pyongyang in the course of nuclear negotiations. North Korea wants security
assurances from the USA, as well as economic rewards such as energy
assistance from the five other countries in the six-party nuclear talks, in
return for its denuclearization efforts.

The fourth round of the multilateral negotiations, which resumed late last
month after a 13-month hiatus, fell short of yielding tangible results
despite the participating nations' intense discussions over the past two
weeks. They decided to have a three-week recess as they differed on the
North's demand to continue "peaceful" nuclear activities.

A diplomatic source said that the four-nation forum on the peace treaty
would likely be formed after the fourth round of the six-party talks is
concluded in a successful manner. "It would herald a dramatic turn in the US
policy toward the North and the whole peninsula," he said.

The USA has kept tens of thousands of soldiers on the southern part of the
peninsula in the past decades to help South Korea protect itself from any
possible invasion from the Stalinist North. Pundits say a peace treaty would
have a significant impact on the status of the forces.
*************************************************

3.   SIX-PARTY TALKS PUT SPOTLIGHT ON US 'DOUBLE STANDARDS'
     Chosun Ilbo, 8 August 2005

The US non-proliferation policy has come under fresh fire for double
standards as six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program went into
recess amid disagreement between Washington and Pyongyang over the peaceful
use of nuclear power. The USA is adamant that North Korea cannot be allowed
a nuclear program of any kind, even as it applies quite different standards
to Iran and India. When the EU last week proposed long-term support for
Iran's nuclear energy program on the conditions it gives up uranium
enrichment and submits to IAEA inspections, Washington indicated support.

The USA acknowledged Iran's right to develop nuclear energy peacefully,
despite strong suspicions that Tehran has a nuclear weapons program. The
contrast with Washington's North Korea policy is glaring. Iran in any case
rejected the offer on Sunday, saying it needs to enrich uranium for energy
development purposes.

On July 18, meanwhile, the USA agreed to provide civilian-use nuclear
technology, equipment and fuel to India, which had been under international
sanctions for its secret nuclear weapons program and has conducted nuclear
tests. India has never joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and any IAEA
inspections would remain purely voluntary even if it receives nuclear
equipment from Washington.

That inconsistency, critics say, erodes trust in the US commitment to
fighting nuclear proliferation. The Wall Street Journal said Monday that
Washington's hard-line attitude to Pyongyang and the unfairness of its
anti-nuclear proliferation strategy was at the core of the debate over
solutions proposed for North Korea on the one hand and Iran on the other. No
clear explanation has been forthcoming. In the case of Iran, Washington
earlier took the same line as with North Korea: that uranium enrichment
technology can be used to develop nuclear weapons, therefore Tehran cannot
have a peaceful nuclear energy program either, nor does it need one, given
its abundant oil resources.

The about-turn, experts say, reflects differences in the way the USA views
Iran and North Korea, and Washington's faith in the negotiations the EU is
conducting. Iran is already undergoing IAEA inspections and remains a
signatory to the NPT. In addition, unlike North Korea, Iran is not seen as
an imminent threat because it will reportedly need another five to 10 years
before it has the wherewithal to make the bomb.

North Korea, on the other hand, has both brazenly violated the 1991
Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the 1994
Geneva Accords, and pulled out of the NPT in January 2003, while its nuclear
arms program is allegedly well advanced. These are points against the
Stalinist country and for a softer line on Iran cited by the US media.

India, to all intents and purposes now a member of the nuclear club, is a
democracy, which the USA believes would not peddle nuclear weapons or
technology to terrorist groups. There is also a strategic consideration,
with Washington hoping to hug the world's second most populous country
closer to its chest as a deterrent against the expansion of Chinese military
power, quite apart from the billions of dollars in potential revenues from
selling nuclear fuel and facilities to Delhi.
*************************************************

4.   SEOUL FACES DAUNTING DIPLOMATIC TASKS DURING RECESS
     by Lee Chi-dong, Yonhap, 8 August 2005

The resumed six-way talks sowed the seeds of a diplomatic solution to the
North Korean nuclear crisis despite an unscheduled recess, a senior South
Korean official said on Monday. He said that Seoul would use the three-week
break to make every diplomatic effort to narrow differences between the
United States and North Korea over Pyongyang's pursuit of civilian nuclear
activity, the biggest obstacle to a much-awaited statement of agreements.

"In a sense, Seoul's diplomatic role and ability has been put to a real
test," he said. "It is Seoul that can broker a deal that seems to be
difficult to make between Pyongyang and Washington."

The recess will not sap the energy of the talks, but will inject fresh
momentum into them, he added. The official, who asked not to be named,
pointed out that the situation could have been worse.

"Initially, China proposed to end the fourth round of talks, and hold the
fifth round in October," he said. "South Korean delegates called for a
recess and the talks to be reconvened this month."

He drew a clear line between before and after the negotiations that resumed
on July 26 after a 13-month break.

"The countries participating in the talks reached an agreement on the
general principle of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula," he said. "It is
big progress compared with Pyongyang's declaration in February that it has
become a nuclear power and subsequent talk of taking the matter to the UN
Security Council."

In a sense, full-scale negotiations will start in the second stage of the
fourth round of talks, he said. He also admitted that the participants in
the six-party talks discussed ways of establishing a formal peace settlement
in Northeast Asia to replace the unstable armistice following the 1950-53
Korean War.

"The talks are now aimed at finding a more fundamental measure for regional
peace as well as ending the nuclear crisis," he said. His assessment came as
South Korean envoys to the talks were busy consulting related officials on
the interim results of nearly two weeks of negotiations with representatives
from the North, the USA, China, Japan, and Russia.

Chief delegate Song Min-soon was to brief his seniors later in the day on
the results at a meeting presided over by Unification Minister Chung
Dong-young, who doubles as the chairman of the National Security Council
(NSC).

"The meeting is to review the development of the talks and prepare for
further negotiations," an NSC official said. "Participants will also discuss
strategy for the three weeks before the talks are reconvened."

Seoul is encouraged by its active role in the Beijing talks. It is also said
to have paved the way for the resumption of the nuclear disarmament talks
with its offer of electricity aid to the desperately energy-stricken
communist state. South Korea wants to replace the moribund light-water
reactor project with its provision of 2 million kilowatts of electricity if
the North decides to abandon its nuclear weapons program. The proposal is
still valid, although the North is seeking to develop nuclear facilities to
generate energy, officials here said.

Seoul is planning to keep open its direct dialogue channel with Pyongyang,
while having bilateral contacts with Beijing and Washington to explore ways
of moving forward in the six-party talks. High-profile government officials
from the two sides are scheduled to meet in Seoul next week for joint
celebrations of the 60th anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese
colonial rule.

The North's delegation will be headed by Kim Ki-nam, secretary of the
Workers' Party, known to be a key aide of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.
The four-day festival, starting Sunday, is likely to serve as a good
opportunity for Seoul to urge Pyongyang to come around.
*************************************************

5.   CAN DIFFERENCES BE RECONCILED AFTER RECESS?
     by Kim Kwang-tae, Yonhap, 7 August 2005

Frustrated by a lack of progress in the deadlocked six-nation talks on North
Korea's nuclear program, the top US envoy said last week that a recess would
be a second best choice. The comment by Assistant US Secretary of State
Christopher Hill underscores how difficult it is to move forward the
hard-won negotiating forum which was revived after a 13-month hiatus. The
adoption of a joint statement is the most desirable, but if that is
impossible, a recess would be a second best option and then comes a
chairman's statement, Hill was quoted as telling reporters.

After the best option proved elusive, the six countries involved in the
talks -- the two Koreas, the United States, host China, Japan and Russia --
decided on Sunday to take a three-week break. The talks will resume in late
August, but there is no guarantee that the negotiations would come to a
successful conclusion. Another failure would certainly call into question
the whole negotiating process. Three previous rounds in 2003 and 2004, also
in Beijing, ended with chairman's statements which summarized the issues
discussed but provided no strong call for action from any of the parties
involved.

Even before Sunday's decision to adjourn the talks, Kenneth Quinones, a
former US official specializing in Korean affairs, said a recess is not a
good sign, because "that's exactly what they are looking for: the hard
liners" in both the United States and North Korea. Quinones, who headed the
Korea Desk at the US State Department under the Clinton Administration,
quoted an American source in Beijing as saying that "everyone" in the
Chinese capital was pessimistic about the talks.

Disagreement was evident between the two main adversaries, North Korea and
the United States. The North agreed to trade off its weapons-related nuclear
program for political and economic rewards but insisted on retaining its
right to a peaceful nuclear program. The United States has been refusing to
allow the North to use nuclear technology for power generation and other
peaceful purposes over proliferation concerns, citing the communist
country's record of adapting its nuclear research facilities to assist in
weapons development.

North Korea currently has only one operational nuclear reactor, a 5-megawatt
experimental reactor located at its main nuclear complex in Yongbyon. The
country has used the Soviet-built, graphite-moderated facility to extract
plutonium, a key material for nuclear bombs.

The present nuclear row erupted after the USA claimed in 2002 that North
Korea was pushing a uranium-based arms program, in addition to its
acknowledged plutonium-based one, in violation of a 1994 agreement. The
North has denied making the confession. The United States subsequently
halted promised fuel oil shipments to North Korea, which responded by
kicking out UN nuclear monitors and withdrawing from the global
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Quoting US government sources in Washington, international media reported
that during this round of talks in Beijing, the United States offered to
allow North Korea to keep a civilian nuclear program if it rejoined the NPT
and permitted stringent UN inspections. North Korea turned down the US
proposal as conditional. It was particularly negative to the idea of
receiving inspections from the UN International Atomic Energy Agency,
according to media reports.

The North Koreans reportedly complained that the US proposal for their
country is quite opposite to its earlier decision to allow peaceful nuclear
activities for Iran, another country accused of trying to produce nuclear
arms.

"Every country in the world has the right to peaceful nuclear activities.
Only one country opposes it," a disgruntled North Korean envoy, Kim Kye
Gwan, told reporters in Beijing last week, apparently referring to the
United States. "Does it make sense if our country, neither a war loser nor a
criminal state, should be denied peaceful nuclear activities?" he said.

Hill said South Korea's massive electricity aid offer would preclude North
Korea's demand for peaceful nuclear activities. Seoul has offered to supply
North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity beginning in 2008 if the
communist country agrees to verifiably scrap its nuclear weapons program.

"Even if the talks will resume after a break, it would not be easy to bridge
the wide gap that exists between North Korea and the United States," said
Kim Tae-hyo, an international relations professor at Sungkyunkwan University
in Seoul.
*************************************************

6.   INSPECTING DPRK NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES POSES CHALLENGE
     by Kurt Achin, VOA News, 25 July 2005

If this week's six-party talks in Beijing make progress in convincing North
Korea to end its nuclear weapons program, the task of verifying whether the
Pyongyang government has truly disarmed is likely to prove challenging.
(...) The United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy
Agency, says a pledge of cooperation would be a good first step in resolving
the North Korean nuclear crisis. But Melissa Fleming, spokeswoman for the
IAEA, says a final agreement would have to go much further.

"Even more important is legal authority for the IAEA to go beyond what North
Korea declares to us and be able to investigate whether there is perhaps
secret nuclear activity going on," she said.

Despite previous agreements to end its nuclear programs, North Korea's
record on observing international nuclear monitoring standards is not
encouraging. IAEA publications say Pyongyang has frustrated and harassed
inspection activities since the early 1990s, and point to periods when it is
not fully certain how much weapons-grade material may have been processed.
(...) Ms. Fleming says any declarations by North Korea about its nuclear
disarmament would have no credibility unless matched by unfettered access
for inspectors.

"It just wouldn't do much good. No one would feel assured by those
declarations by the North Korean side," said Ms. Fleming.
North Korea has never publicly acknowledged having a highly enriched
uranium, or HEU, program. But even if it continues to deny the existence of
such a program at the six-party talks, Ms. Fleming says an inspection
process would have to allow for all possibilities.

"We have suspicious minds, and if there are indications from anywhere that
there might be another program, in the case of North Korea, a uranium
enrichment program, then we would do everything possible to investigate
those suspicions."
Bruce Cumings, a North Korea specialist at the University of Chicago, is
skeptical that North Korea, one of the world's most secretive countries,
would give inspectors the access they would need.

"The highly enriched uranium processors could be anywhere," he said. "The
bombs that they may have produced could be anywhere. So you're going to have
to imagine a very wide and verifiable inspection of North Korea, which is
hard to imagine."
International organizations have had little success in gaining access to
North Korea. Pyongyang has never allowed a specially appointed United
Nations human rights researcher to set foot in the country, and the UN World
Food Program says it is not allowed to deliver aid everywhere it would like.
South Korean officials and other advocates of engagement with North Korea
say the six-party talks must adequately address Pyongyang's security
concerns, and thereby remove its incentive for operating secret nuclear
programs. But some researchers point out the threat of nuclear weapons is
Pyongyang's only leverage in the international community, and it is unlikely
to completely dismantle the programs that provide that leverage.

Kim Young-soo, a foreign affairs specialist at Sogang University in Seoul,
is blunt about the detective work that awaits any inspectors. Mr. Kim says
inspectors will be looking for packages of weapons-grade nuclear material
about the size of a fist and asks: how are they supposed to find them?

IAEA officials say that with enough time and access, they have the
technology to know with reasonable certainty whether North Korea is keeping
its word on disarmament. Whether that access will be available to them is a
question that this week's six-party talks are unlikely to answer.
*************************************************

7.   FRESH SIX-PARTY DRAFT LETS ALL SIDES SAVE FACE
     Chosun Ilbo, 3 August 2005

A South Korean official said Wednesday a final draft statement of principles
at six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear programs was written to allow
both Pyongyang and the USA to claim they got their way. He said the draft
allowed North Korea to claim it won the right to continue peaceful use of
nuclear energy while the USA and Japan can claim that the Stalinist country
has abandoned it. He said the two sides engaged in a little give and take.

The US initially called for North Korea to dismantle all of its nuclear
weapons and programs, but Pyongyang said it would dismantle only nuclear
weapons and weapon programs. China's initial draft reportedly made "all
nuclear weapons and related programs" subject to dismantlement, clearly
allowing the North to use atomic energy peacefully. Washington and Tokyo
found this unacceptable, and China revised the draft to include "all nuclear
weapons and nuclear programs."

But it opened a back door. "The sentence, 'North Korea may not use nuclear
energy peacefully until it rejoins the NPT and undergoes IAEA inspections,'
is clear no matter how you look at it," a South Korean official said. "But
it means that after a set period it will no longer be forbidden" to use
nuclear energy peacefully.

In return, North Korea was reportedly handed another chance to save face.
The term "dismantlement," for which the US had pushed and to which North
Korea objected, is said to have been replaced with the word "abandonment."

Abandonment suggests a voluntary surrender of something you are entitled to
and naturally leads to compensation. Dismantlement, by contrast, suggests
something is being eliminated. If it "abandons" nuclear weapons and
programs, moreover, North Korea can continue to fudge the question whether
it had any nuclear arms in the first place.

"The difference between dismantlement and abandonment is not particularly
significant," the official commented. "The meaning is the same -- that a
body recognized as an authority in the international community will directly
eliminate all nuclear facilities and programs, including peaceful-use
facilities, from North Korea in a verifiable way."
*************************************************

End CanKor # 215

*************************************************
CanKor is an electronic information service for readers interested in the
issues of peace and security on the Korean peninsula, published by
Weingartner Consulting. Financial support is received from the Canadian
International Development Agency (CIDA). Views expressed on the CanKor
website or weekly digest are those of the respective authors, and do not
necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of CanKor, CIDA or
Weingartner Consulting. CanKor accepts no liability for inaccuracies, errors
or omissions.  Copyright of all items listed or reprinted rests with the
original publishers.  CanKor provides links to originals when available. To
subscribe or unsubscribe, and for all other communication, please address
the CanKor editorial team by e-mail at editor at CanKor.ca. Editor: Erich
Weingartner; Managing Editor: Miranda Weingartner; Research: Marion Current,
Ilene Solomon, Danielle Goldfinger; Web developer: David Seguin. Please
visit our website at: www.CanKor.ca
*************************************************